I have been away, so my comments are late... > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of tom.petch > Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2008 6:43 PM > To: Chris Lonvick; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Syslog] Need your input on finalissuesondraft-ietf- > syslog-transport-tls >
[snip] > > b) Technically, I think it the wrong direction to allow a common name > to > override a subjectAltName, I believe the world is going the other way; > and I am > unclear from this how much wildcarding is permitted in a locally > configured name > (seems to be unconstrained ). I agree with Tom. I think we should NOT MANDATE to check the common name if a subject AltName is present. I always understood the previous text so that common name would be a fallback if and only if no subjectAltName was present. Rainer _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
